USATF Needs a Do-Over

You may have noticed that our sport has been in the news a lot lately. The IAAF (International Association of Athletics Federations) is in charge of our entire sport internationally, and if you haven’t been reading up, there are scandals galore that range from bribes to favor the bids of certain countries to coverups for a gazillion Russian doper to the big cheese in charge of anti-doping recently stepping down following claims that suspicious blood tests of hundreds of International Medal performers were never followed up on with targeted drug testing. Since the integrity and future of our sport is in jeopardy at the IAAF, it suddenly becomes very important which people we vote into positions of power.

At the USATF meeting a few weeks ago, the constituents (coaches, volunteers, athletes, race directors, and more) voted for which person we wanted to represent the USA on the IAAF council, and a series of mind-boggling events happened. There was a vote from “the people” (the constituents) and then a vote “from the board.” The people voted 390 to 72. The 390 went to Bob Hersh, the well-liked guy who has been doing the job for 16 years and has worked his way up to senior vice president of the whole IAAF with no evidence of scandal or wrong doing. The 72 was for Stephanie Hightower, the current president and chairman of the USATF board, who many people seem to openly dislike, to put it mildly.

What follows are the facts, and the things that have unleashed a poop storm.

A vote among the people is introduced.

The people vote for Bob 392 to 70.

Board exercises right to overturn electorate by seeking 2/3 vote.

Board votes 11-1 for Stephanie.

The crowd goes wild (in a bad way).

Board members receive hate mail and conspiracy theories abound.

I wrote a blog about my experience at the meeting that was widely circulated; my experience started with optimism, was slathered with confusion, and ended with bafflement and a call for answers. I received follow-ups from media sources, criticism, and questions about my motivation.

I wrote the blog because our sport has a lot of things wrong with it and this one event is a great example of how USATF so often fails us. Our leadership team is doing a lot of great things too, and I believe they are working their butts off, but they are effing up pretty royally in some important ways (transparency, inclusion) that need to have light shed on them in order for them to change. My goal is not to stir things up for the sake of it. I have enough else to do that is more positively affirming and rewarding. But being a window into the sport we all love for people who care, and occasionally helping mobilize people, can get USATF to up their game for the sake of the sport. I’m not going to get it right every time and I’ll be open to changing my mind with new information.

As a pretty new watcher of governance in the sport, here are things that didn’t add up to me:

Why would the board choose to vote on something that was such a landslide?

How could the overall board’s vote and the people’s vote be so different?

Why do so many people in the general electorate distrust Stephanie?

To find answers, I emailed CEO Max Siegel and the three athlete representatives on the Board: Doc Patton, Hyleas Fountain, and Curt Claussen.

Max never replied. Curt emailed back and said he was the one vote for Bob.

Hyleas emailed several days later offering to talk on the phone, but has since been unavailable.

Doc emailed several days later offering to talk and was extremely responsive in scheduling a time, and we talked on the phone a few days ago for almost an hour.

Both of us shared our frustrations with the situation, and while we had different opinions on certain things, we had a lot of common ground, and we both learned a lot. Here are my takeaways from the conversation with Doc that have influenced my recommendations for how we proceed.

Takeaways:

Up until the last minute, the members of the board were expecting that the IAAF council vote was exclusively up to them, because it was.

Up until 2009, “the people” got to vote for who our IAAF council was. The past few years that the decision was given over to the board.

A piece of emergency legislation was introduced last minute to allow for a vote by the people first, with an allowance that the board could overturn it with a 2/3 vote. This legislation passed.

Introducing emergency legislation is an unusual thing, and the emergency nature of it was confusing to many people. This explains how the board (three of the members were brand spanking new) could conceivably proceed with their original plan to vote the way they feel, without really taking into account “the people’s” vote. In the end, they still had the final say.

“The people” were not given presentations from Stephanie and Bob on their vision and goals before the vote was taken, but the board was. Doc said, “if the athletes would have had an opportunity to see the presentations, the vote would have looked different…the athletes would have seen and heard what we saw and heard first hand…and typically the membership sides with the athletes.”

Bob and Stephanie agreed not to campaign in the lead up to the people’s vote. It is unclear whether they both expected to campaign for the board’s vote.

Doc said that several board members intended to vote for Bob before those presentations but that “based upon Bob and Stephanie’s presentations, in my opinion, it was clear to the board – both new and existing members – that Stephanie had a vision and a plan for the position that Bob failed to articulate. Even if some of the board members intended on voting differently, I believe the difference between the presentations was substantial. I love Bob, and have a ton of respect for him, but what he brought to the table wasn’t enough to influence my vote.”

I believe Doc. He was sincere and frustrated with the process, and if I had any suspicions beforehand of his intentions, they were pretty much eliminated after our conversation. He did what he felt was best with the information he had at the time. He has been getting absolutely skewered by people, strangers have been emailing demanding his resignation, etc. Doc, like the rest of us, would love more information.

My conversation with Doc was a reminder that we need to be talking to one another. That communication is absolutely critical. And without it, we end up with battle plans rather than strategies to improve things.

What Should We Do About It?

David Greifinger presented an action plan to improve the way governance works. You can read it here. He is also the same guy who introduced the emergency legislation. Basically it lays out a plan to ask our board members to rescind their vote for Stephanie to match the vote of the people the next time they meet in February. Then it recommends making sweeping changes to how our board works next year at the annual meeting, returning more power to the people so the board can’t be an echo chamber working in isolation.

For the most part, I think this plan is strong. From my research to date, David has been a consistent activist for transparency, works hard to keep us informed, and has been an anchor for the athletes as they come and go. But given the circumstances of the #crazyvote, I would suggest an adjustment to the approach.

I think that in February the board should absolutely vote again, but I would not make the purpose to overturn their previous vote. I think the purpose should be to vote again with all the information out on the table for everyone to consider properly to come to the best decision, transparently.

If the people’s vote is going to mean anything, they need to have the same information as the board. Therefore I recommend the following happen.

Bob and Stephanie get a chance to campaign publicly, with press releases stating their positions, and why people should vote for them.

For the hordes of people who seem to have problems with Stephanie but won’t say why “for fear of retribution” as I’ve heard soooo many times since my blog came out, you have between now and then to man/woman up and show us the damn skeletons. I don’t want a “crazy person” representing me in the IAAF or USATF for that matter, but if you’re gonna fling mud, come out with the evidence. This article in the Orange County Register is a start. Is it enough?

Before the board meets in February, the people should be provided with an opportunity to vote again remotely using 21st century technology with the new information.

The board should vote again and communicate about the result in a timely manner.

For me personally, I would love an opportunity to make an educated choice. I would love to include more recreational runners who are passionate about this sport in the process. I want to give our leadership the benefit of the doubt, but I want to hear USATF commit to restoring trust. I want open communication and no more backdoor deals like the Nike one that lasts for 26 years and affects the viability of my profession by selling the rights to ALL national team uniforms to Nike, requiring athletes to remain silent about their own sponsors when they are on the biggest stages (obviously a bummer for those sponsors who have invested a lot), without compensating the athletes for any of it. Meanwhile the majority of pros in my sport who qualify for those USA teams live under the poverty line. Basically I don’t want deals that affect athletes so dramatically happening without significant athlete input. I would also love to mobilize people at the next annual meeting to make the changes necessary to strike the balance between the people being heard, the board being held accountable, and preserving the ability for the board to get things done and run the business of our sport.

What can you do? Please keep the athletes who represent all of us on the world stage in your heart as you train for your own goals and your health. When the time comes where we ask for your help, help if you can. This might be contributing to a kickstarter campaign to get more athletes to the 2015 annual meeting. It might mean signing a petition. It might mean doing what you can to make “being informed” cool in your running community.

There are good people behind the scenes working on strategies to improve things. I’ll continue to do my best to learn with an independent critical eye, and share good sources of information via social channels to keep people who care in the loop. If you can further share what resonates with you, awesome. This sport belongs to all of us.

Thanks for reading,

Lauren

Lauren FleshmanLauren Fleshman is a pro runner with Oiselle and cofounder of Picky Bars.

A Part of Hearst Digital Media
Runner's World participates in various affiliate marketing programs, which means we may get paid commissions on editorially chosen products purchased through our links to retailer sites.